A while ago, I had the chance to set my literature students the question: "Why is it important to study the history of English Literature in the 21^st century Pakistan?" While a large number of students harped on the familiar no-argument-only-rhetoric line that helps them attain passing marks in most subjects, there were the odd three or four who actually considered the question in its context.

The debate becomes important in light of a recent video that ‘went viral’, as our youngsters like to put it. Uploaded by a film actor, the video shows a shabbily dressed tramp speaking fluent English. Television channels jumped to the cue. The man was offered a job and another video was duly uploaded showing him paying his gratitude to the actor who had brought him into the limelight.

While helping beggars and tramps acquire respectable jobs is by all means a commendable thing, the irony must not be allowed to pass us by. The only reason why internet users in Pakistan found the video remarkable was because they did not expect a man of the tramp’s appearance to speak English! After all, we spend a lot of money on our education and bearing. Would we react in this way to a tramp speaking pristine Urdu or classical Punjabi? We would notice him, at best, but what is remarkable about a poor man speaking the poor people’s languages?

This obsession with an English-speaking poor-man-on-the-street stands in contrast to the recent revival of the Urdu-as-the-national-language and revival-of-regional-languages debates; especially after a Supreme Court observation that reminded officialdom of the mandated use of Urdu in official documents. The argument for not reverting to Urdu is based on the need of English as a lingua franca. Translating all documentation into the national language and then translating it again (or back) into English for all sorts of international purposes (identification, travel, admission applications, trade etc.) seems like a pointless running around in circles.

The postcolonial angst against the former colonial master’s language aside, there is no real point to be made in preferring Urdu to English as an official language. One cannot ask the tail to start chasing the dog because the dog has thus far insisted on chasing it.

Coming back to the question my hapless students had to answer, while studying literature from all across the globe is now at the heart of teaching literature across the world, there is no longer any real distinction being made in favour of literature from England. While studying the history of literature from England may be important for scholars studying the linguistic evolution of English or those who want to study regional differences in thematic and structural content, literature in English has long since moved from being Euro-centric.

Our obsession with continental English is quite rooted in our colonial past. It is also a necessity in a world where traditional boundaries are being challenged and intellectual landscapes are increasingly dependent on a lingua franca. It does not surprise me that our curricula still focus on teaching the history of Britain as the backdrop of teaching English Studies. While institutions like Punjab University and FC College, to name two, have successfully managed to keep abreast of the times, and have embraced non-British literatures in their curricula, other colonially-established institutions still resolutely insist on not moving past texts that were inducted in the syllabi about a century ago.

What this creates, in fact, is a disconnect between the courses we monotonously subject our students to and the market-oriented postcolonial refocused teaching that the rest of the world has moved on to. Very few students, if any, pursue higher degrees in Shakespearean Studies, for example. That is not to say that continental Literature does not have a scope in western academia. What it really implies is that our distance from western progress in literature is such that our scholarship in European literature does not merit comparison with international standards.

The necessity of English as an international language is undeniable. Equally important is the need to reinforce indigenous literatures, whether produced in regional languages or in English, first in the original language of composition, and then through translation. The dissemination of native knowledge can only be made possible through this two-fold acceptance and appropriation of the former master’s legacy.

The writer is a lecturer in English at Government College University